4 ms·

Am I the only one shaking my head that they kept comparing the M3 chips against M1 chips skipping M2? Just like the last product release spent more time on huf

Am I the only one shaking my head that they kept comparing the M3 chips against M1 chips skipping M2? Just like the last product release spent more time on huffing their own farts (the Apple Watch is the first of its kind carbon negative product), there is no real innovation or something to garner interest for me here.

teaearlgraycold 3y ago
Way more people bought in to M1 than M2, so they're a bigger customer base to sell to. But didn't I see something about M3 being 2x faster than M2? I'm sure that's some BS about it being 2x faster in a specific benchmark. But I'm sure it's still a good generational improvement. Edit: I love seeing what HN will downvote. Absolutely hilarious.
zamalek 3y ago
I guess they are seeing too many M1s in the wild - you're supposed to upgrade to a new Apple device a d create e-waste.
- hotnfresh 3y ago
  E-waste? Apple devices retain their value really well. If you don’t hand them down, you sell them.
wsc981 3y ago
Not real innovation (when comparing with Windows world) but having support for hardware raytracing now is definitely nice for games. However, then on the information page they show Myst. Doesn't look spectacular to be honest, probably doesn't make use of hardware raytracing anyways. Having a short video of a fast-paced shooter with hardware ray-tracing support would be more impressive. I guess it will take some time until games will adopt new Metal graphic APIs for hardware raytracing.
- sosodev 3y ago
  Myst supports ray-traced reflections. I agree that it's not a particularly good show piece though.
sosodev 3y ago
Are they not supposed to make comparisons? I don't understand what alternative you would like.
- schneems 3y ago
  I understood they wanted a comparison to the M2, the most recent version. Most people care about “what changed since last version” it’s disingenuous to say “X faster!! (Than an model out date by a year)”
- olliej 3y ago
  I assume the question is why there are comparisons to M1 instead of only having M2 comparisons.
jdprgm 3y ago
The focus seemed particularly on people still on intel macbooks and selling them on upgrading. I don't think they would usually reference a product that outdated at this point but they brought it up several times highlighting 11x faster.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
cstejerean 3y ago
I think it makes sense in that the people that bought M2 are not likely to be in the market for an M3. The people looking to buy an M3 are likely upgrading from either an M1 or an older Intel based MBP.
lttlrck 3y ago
The mainstream marketing for iPhone 15 is only highlighting that's its made from titanium... I'm sure there is some innovation in manufacturing, and I do love my 15, but it's devoid of any innovation.
cglong 3y ago
A few years ago, I tried to figure out the battery life of the latest iPhone. The comparison page would only say "2 more hours than iPhone X", "4 more hours than iPhone 8", etc. Eventually I worked my way backwards to the iPhone 6 where the battery life was just listed as "—".
- duskwuff 3y ago
  https://www.apple.com/iphone-15/specs/ https://www.apple.com/iphone-15/specs/ Scroll down to "Power and Battery", about halfway down the page.
m3kw9 3y ago
They compare to M1 because that is their target audience upgrades not M2.
Jensson 3y ago
The M2 was a tiny upgrade over the M1 since the 5nm to 4nm step was tiny, 4nm was basically 5nm. The M3 is probably running on TSMC's 3nm which is a huge improvement over both their 5nm and 4nm processes.
mayoff 3y ago
There's the obvious, that they want to say higher numbers. But also, I bought a 16" MacBook Pro M1 Max when it was announced. The M2 Max replacement was announced only 15 months later and didn't seem like a big enough improvement to justify buying. Maybe they know there are a lot of M1 owners with my mindset, and we're who they're pitching.
turtlebits 3y ago
There's a slide comparing them all. https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Screenshot-2023-10-30-at-8.47.43%E2%80%AFPM-1440x900.jpeg https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Scree...

teaearlgraycold 3y ago

Way more people bought in to M1 than M2, so they're a bigger customer base to sell to. But didn't I see something about M3 being 2x faster than M2? I'm sure that's some BS about it being 2x faster in a specific benchmark. But I'm sure it's still a good generational improvement. Edit: I love seeing what HN will downvote. Absolutely hilarious.

zamalek 3y ago

I guess they are seeing too many M1s in the wild - you're supposed to upgrade to a new Apple device a d create e-waste.

hotnfresh 3y ago
E-waste? Apple devices retain their value really well. If you don’t hand them down, you sell them.

wsc981 3y ago

Not real innovation (when comparing with Windows world) but having support for hardware raytracing now is definitely nice for games. However, then on the information page they show Myst. Doesn't look spectacular to be honest, probably doesn't make use of hardware raytracing anyways. Having a short video of a fast-paced shooter with hardware ray-tracing support would be more impressive. I guess it will take some time until games will adopt new Metal graphic APIs for hardware raytracing.

sosodev 3y ago
Myst supports ray-traced reflections. I agree that it's not a particularly good show piece though.

sosodev 3y ago

Are they not supposed to make comparisons? I don't understand what alternative you would like.

schneems 3y ago
I understood they wanted a comparison to the M2, the most recent version. Most people care about “what changed since last version” it’s disingenuous to say “X faster!! (Than an model out date by a year)”
olliej 3y ago
I assume the question is why there are comparisons to M1 instead of only having M2 comparisons.

jdprgm 3y ago

The focus seemed particularly on people still on intel macbooks and selling them on upgrading. I don't think they would usually reference a product that outdated at this point but they brought it up several times highlighting 11x faster.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

cstejerean 3y ago

I think it makes sense in that the people that bought M2 are not likely to be in the market for an M3. The people looking to buy an M3 are likely upgrading from either an M1 or an older Intel based MBP.

lttlrck 3y ago

The mainstream marketing for iPhone 15 is only highlighting that's its made from titanium... I'm sure there is some innovation in manufacturing, and I do love my 15, but it's devoid of any innovation.

cglong 3y ago

A few years ago, I tried to figure out the battery life of the latest iPhone. The comparison page would only say "2 more hours than iPhone X", "4 more hours than iPhone 8", etc. Eventually I worked my way backwards to the iPhone 6 where the battery life was just listed as "—".

duskwuff 3y ago
https://www.apple.com/iphone-15/specs/ https://www.apple.com/iphone-15/specs/ Scroll down to "Power and Battery", about halfway down the page.

m3kw9 3y ago

They compare to M1 because that is their target audience upgrades not M2.

Jensson 3y ago

The M2 was a tiny upgrade over the M1 since the 5nm to 4nm step was tiny, 4nm was basically 5nm. The M3 is probably running on TSMC's 3nm which is a huge improvement over both their 5nm and 4nm processes.

mayoff 3y ago

There's the obvious, that they want to say higher numbers. But also, I bought a 16" MacBook Pro M1 Max when it was announced. The M2 Max replacement was announced only 15 months later and didn't seem like a big enough improvement to justify buying. Maybe they know there are a lot of M1 owners with my mindset, and we're who they're pitching.

turtlebits 3y ago

There's a slide comparing them all. https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Screenshot-2023-10-30-at-8.47.43%E2%80%AFPM-1440x900.jpeg https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Scree...